The archived blog of the Project On Government Oversight (POGO).

Jun 08, 2006

Hunter's Titan Ties

While Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA) tops thenews in the unfolding earmarks-for-bribes investigations, also under scrutiny is House Armed Services Committee (HASC) Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-CA). For the most part, interest has been focused on companies led by defense contractors Brent Wilkes and Mitchell Wade. But as the investigations have expanded, questions are increasingly being raised about the relationships between other defense contractors and legislators.

Perhaps worth a look: the actions of Hunter vis-à-vis San Diego’s Titan Corporation.

Included in some bills, for example, are earmarks beyond what the Pentagon requested for two Navy projects, the experimental Sea Fighter LCS(X) craft and the Affordable Weapons System (AWS). Both projects have been championed by Hunter, and are contracted by Titan.

Both projects, however, have not been met with universal acclaim within the Navy. Though the AWS--touted as a cheap, off-the-shelf alternative to the Tactical Tomahawk--has consistently been praised in House Armed Services Committee reports, a Navy report recently submitted to Congress was less sanguine about the project that Hunter has earmarked $27 million for in the latest House Defense Authorization bill. An excerpt from the Navy communique as reported in a May 29, 2006, Inside the Navy story:

Originally the [Affordable Weapon System] provided much promise, however, it has experienced many technical difficulties resulting in zero successful test flights. Numerous non-Navy initiated engineering changes have significantly increased the cost of the missile. While AWS continues to receive Congressional funding, there are a number of other missile concepts that may provide similar solutions...at a reduced cost.

In case of the Sea Fighter LCS(X) craft, $25.7 million was earmarked in the latest defense authorization bill. Yet the LCS(X), according to the National Journal's Megan Scully, who also took a look at Hunter's Titan ties today:

...does not have a place in the Navy's ambitious 313-ship plan, which [Congressional Budget Office] already views as potentially unaffordable. And the vessel has spent two of the last four months dry-docked for major repairs to its propulsion and other systems.

"For a ship that's brand new, it has a lot of problems," said one Navy official.

Titan was acquired last year by L3 Communications, which is currently the second top corporate donor to both Hunter and Lewis.

Duncan Hunter is a long-standing perpetual advocate for a considerably larger budget for the Navy than the CBO wants to approve. He is not trolling opportunistically for some boond-doggles to front for. Quite the opposite.

It is the so-called watch-dogs that have the ulterior agendas. Including the Administration, which believes in some magical "transformation" that essentially ends the need for all manned vehicles whatsoever.

The CBO has some anti-defense idealogues who believe that somehow we can get by with a puny 200 ship navy. So they are already opposed in principle to the idea of the proposed 313 ship Navy, not to mention the affordability of what Bush came into the White House with...a 344 Ship Navy. And that was easily affordable then. But due to unilateral reductions...by the Pentagon...ignoring Congressional mandates on expenditures (such as the size of the Carrier fleet)...all for "savings" that are realized by these dubious-legality cuts in forces... never seem to get translated back into the Naval ship procurement budget. As a consequence, there is a real crisis brewing in the Naval forces.

We are down to only 286 ships. The White House has been peremptorily ignoring the experts, and overriding them at the Pentagon, ignoring how many carriers are needed [15] and attack subs [68]

The "connection" to Titan is also almost laughable. Duncan was for these projects that he is being innuendoed about...long before L3 Communications bought Titan. As for the two weapons systems being attacked, they are both "cutting edge" or as is known in the biz, it is not surprising. The LCS, Littoral Combat System (X) for example stands for EXPERIMENTAL!!!!

These are path-breaking approaches. There will be engineering issues that need to be confronted, and trying to do them on the cheap may not work out. We'll see. Rather premature to be throwing out the idea at the very first road block. And the LCS is indeed, very pivotal to future navy procurement plans, so I have no idea what Scully or you are talking about that it is not encompassed in the 313 ship navy. It is a contingent plan. Waiting to see how the new R&D of the LCS(X) pans out.

As for the AWS, the on-the-cheap investigation of a new cruise missile design at the Office Of Naval Research which Titan is collaborating with, check out this linked article at Global Security: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/aw.htm. The desert test-firings actually confirmed all of the capabilities that needed to be made by the "off-the-shelf" componentry. So the claim of "failed all tests" sounds to me to have been a seriously significant misstatement. And also keep in mind, even once past prototype stage, there are often production model bugs that need to be ironed out. That is the industrial process.

So let's see some perspective...and more honesty about what kinds of serious advances and...the real challenges confronting them....are being prompted here by a congressman who seems to me to be a serious advocate for giving our forces what they need.